Not properly supporting VLANs is absolute sub-standard for a professional NAS - I can't wrap my mind around this...

It could be so easy: with VLAN support enabled you split the config in a physical and a logical section. In the physical section you set up links and tagging and create logical interfaces, in the logical section you set up IPs etc. for the logical interfaces. In service binding you change from physical NICs to logical VLAN instances - that's it. You could run each service on its own logical interface in a separate VLAN.

I need to separate iSCSI from the other services. As it is, I need to use dedicated NICs which is a show-stopper performance wise.

This is so crucial feature, that in December 2015 I still can't understand why does QNAP refuse to implement it !! Thread started more than 4 years ago and still no answer.I have 1280,1279, 1079, with newest beta firmware and I was hoping for the Virtual Switch to have this option but was let down again and again.Any official explanation as to why isn't this feature available?I am using 10 GB T interfaces so vLAN tagging in trunk mode for HA and redundancy of multiple VLANs i a must!!

siwy417 wrote:This is so crucial feature, that in December 2015 I still can't understand why does QNAP refuse to implement it !! ...I have 1280,1279, 1079, with newest beta firmware and I was hoping for the Virtual Switch to have this option but was let down again and again....I am using 10 GB T interfaces so vLAN tagging in trunk mode for HA and redundancy of multiple VLANs i a must!!

About the explanation (and frustration) I've dropped QNAP when exploring the virtual switch feature for the first time some weeks ago.

Please please please QNAP implement this, it's possible from the CLI but only for limited functionality. This is basic functionality these days, I'm thinking that my device will just be a dumb file share now, I had high hopes for buying more for my family too

GeorgeZip wrote:Please please please QNAP implement this, it's possible from the CLI but only for limited functionality. This is basic functionality these days, I'm thinking that my device will just be a dumb file share now...

Thank you for backing! Same here ... please complain to QNAP Customer Service https://helpdesk.qnap.com/ - add a link to this thread, and mention MantisBT 1389.

I read the specs on the TS-453U-RP and decided that it supports VLANs, Trunking and Link Aggregation, all things I need.But apparently it isn't supporting multiple VLANs. This is BS for a NAS in this caliber.

Not much as of now. I'm aware the new Network & Virtual Switch App and the related platform parts are under a massive re-design to bring all the requirements together ... being for pure storage applications (where virtual VLAN interfaces are mandatory), for visualization, for containers, for the Thunderbolt based direct network access, for the TBS NAS with it's physical GbE switch... and hopefully some more, like the "simple" bridging of two GbE interfaces often asked by consumers to connect router and TV for example.

Convinced this is a key reason of the delay we see on the way towards QTS 4.2.1.

I really hope that QNAP will implement this or update it on their Virtual Station very soon because managed switchports are expensive, and having the 10GB nic card connected only to an access port is wasteful with multiple vlans. It still works, but things are being routed unnecessarily.

In my test environment, I have 4 vlans, which means I need to plug 4 cables and use 4 switch port instead of a single trunk and 1 port.It is the EC1080 unit too, somewhat disappointed by the lack of control.

Another quarter passes and no Enterprise solution in place.This is mind boggling that we have already TDS-16489U, TVS-ECx80U series units worth a thousands of dollars yet no simple sub-interface VLAN trunking.I still don't have response in regards to #DHP-826-33919 ticket.Instead of writing another "super app" for photo management please spend time where it matters.

Im very confused by this lack of basic support, I run a very large +200K employee org, and purchased one of these as a home server, with the need for multiple vlans, duh... I cant believe that this company cant figure out VLAN Tagging... I opened a ticket, will probably send this POS back to Amazon tho..